TUDCN 2011-12 external evaluation

TUDCN 2011-12 external evaluation

EVALUATION FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Presented at the GM in Slangerup (Denmark)April 17th, 2013

TUDCN external evaluation 2

Contents

Evaluation characteristics

Evaluation aims, background & scope

Evaluation approach & methodology

Findings: TUDCN key achievements (2011-2012)

Network development

Internal achievements

External achievements

Conclusions & lessons learned

Recommendations

I. EVALUATION CHARACTERISTICS


Evaluation object & scope

Object of the evaluation:

TUDCN 2011-2012 project, funded by the EU

Where necessary: taking into account evolutions of the network since

2006

With special attention to the functioning of the network as the

chosen working modality for the TU Development Cooperation


Evaluation aims

To demonstrate to which extent the TUDCN has been able to produce a specific added value and has the potential to continue doing so in the future;

To account for the use of the resources towards the TUDCN member organisations, the ITUC, donors and the public at large;

To learn lessons from the TUDCN activities, approach and results achieved

=> improvement of the future performance of the network (in particular in relation to the next project that will start in April 2013).


Evaluation methodology (1)Inception phase (November – December):

Initial contacts and discussions with the TUDCN secretariat

Participation (as observer) in the General Meeting in Paris (November 2012)

Implementation phase (January – March): Documentary analysis

Electronic survey, sent to 245 members

Interviews with internal and external stakeholders

Presentation of intermediary findings to the FSG (January 2013)

Synthesis phase (March – April)Analysis and triangulation of findings

Evaluation reportDraft version => sent to the FSG (March 25)

Presentation at the GM

Final evaluation report


Evaluation methodology (2)

Measures to ensure evaluation utilization:

Executive summary in English, French, Spanish

Publication as ‘Development Paper’ on TUDCN’s website

Methodological challenges:

Nature of TUCDN as a worldwide network

Poor response rate to the survey (8.6%) => the results obtained

might not be representative for the network

II. FINDINGS: TUDCN KEY ACHIEVEMENTS (2011-2012)


Internal achievements

External achievements

Network development

Three related categories of achievements


Network development (1/5)

Broad consensus on the relevance and importance of the network goals

Goals widely known and understood by members (at least by those

moderately to strongly involved in the network)

Correspond with the members’ expectations towards the network

Challenge: how to deal with the complexity of members’ interests and

expectations when the network becomes more diverse

Good level of trust: (a) in the work of the secretariat & working groups;

(b) among network members mutually



Members have possibilities to participate in decision-making and

activities => feeling of ownership of the network

Challenges:

Unbalanced participation of members: common in networks, but care

should be taken not to become too much a ‘club of insiders’

Underrepresentation of the South and GUFs

Participation of the South: has increased, but still much to do

Participation GUFs: demand for clarifying the relationship between GUFs

and ITUC/TUDCN



Network structure:

Secretariat:

Highly appreciated by members; competent staff

Risks: to work too autonomously; to focus too much on external work (v. internal network

strengthening and member participation)

FSG: not yet fully taking up its role as governance structure, despite attempts for improvement

General meetings:

important networking moment

Overloaded agendas => little time for liaising, exchange and networking

Working groups:

Outputs highly valued by network members.

Small number of active participants (especially Development Effectiveness WG)



Good communication and information sharing mechanisms in place

TUDCN website, monthly newsletter, projects directory, position papers and briefing notes, …Highly appreciated: allow to remain informed on what is going on in the network and on evolutions in the global development agendaEspecially the newsletter and ITUC briefing notes considered highly usefulWeaknesses:

Mailing list not up-to-date. Member participation in communication is low, mainly due to time

constraints



Major constraint: weak institutionalisation within the ITUC + weak political support for the network

TUDCN seen as a project, not as an intrinsic part of the work of the ITUC

Poor understanding of: (1) development cooperation; (2) the role and added value of TUDCN

Consequences: Legitimacy and sustainability of the network affected

Missed opportunities (e.g. in terms of advocacy)

Needed:Political recognition of TUDCN

Political decision to support the further institutional development of TUDCN

But: some degree of independency needed due to the network character of TUDCN


Internal achievements (1/2)

Strengthened views on development cooperation and

practices, among others via ‘TU principles and Guidelines’:

better positioning within CSO community

better articulating of own identity

TUs opening up for development cooperation issues to some

degree, but all-in-all still rather shallow levels of inclusion and

ownership of development cooperation in TUs


Internal achievements (2/2)

Increased coordination and coherence of TU development cooperation

Before TUDCN: much inefficiency, duplication, competition

Creation of TUDCN filled in an important void

Important challenges remain, in particular in the South: cooperation in Southern

countries and South – South cooperation still weak

Increased TU capacity and effectiveness for development cooperation

via ‘technical’ activities:

TUDEP

guidance note on M&E (in process)

but here also, actual use within organisations remains a challenge


External achievements (1/2)

Significant contribution to common TU positions with regard to development and

development cooperation

So far, relatively easy to develop such common positions

Challenge for the future: representation issue - way of organising internal

consultation (mainly Secretariat that takes initiative – no bottom-up approach to

derive messages from members)

Increased visibility and recognition of TUs as development actors in their own

right

continuous and skilful involvement in key CSO platforms (Development

Effectiveness debate, EU structured dialogue) as main trigger

increased visibility and recognition at regional level: not clear

here also future challenge related to representation


External achievements (2/2)

Enhanced TU contributions in development debates and policies:

closely linked to previous achievement (visibility and recognition)

several success stories at national level (extent of changes at this level not clear)

This ‘must’ have led to ‘some influence’ on outcomes of development debates -

typical TU preoccupations (decent work, ...) brought in. But:

TUDCN acting rather reactively than proactively

High quality inputs in debates seen by some as not sufficiently complemented by

comprehensive campaigning strategy

Improved networking and cooperation

TUs now occupying important position in many CSO platforms (with positive effect on

representation and legitimacy of these platforms)

III. CONCLUSIONS & LESSONS LEARNED


Conclusions (1/2)

TUDCN succeeded to develop itself into a network that is fairly stable, inclusive, representative and legitimate

TUDCN clearly worked along its mandate of improving TU development effectiveness and ensuring input of TU views in development policy debates

Clear signs that TUDCN’s work in these areas has been effective to an important degree

TUDCN has the possibility to further develop the considerable potential of TU involvement in development cooperation and, more generally, in promoting a more equal, democratic and sustainable development


Conclusions (2/2)

Challenges:Sustainability of the network: not yet guaranteed

‘Sustainability’ has not really been an issue in the network

Main challenges: Dependence on external grants

TUDCN’s unclear position under the ITUC umbrella

High level of dependence on individuals

Representation and legitimacyMight increasingly become under scrutiny by both external and

internal partners


Lessons learned

Effective network development:

Is a complicated process

Needs time, resources and strategic competence and direction

Combination between internal and external objectives is possible

Synergic effects can be produced

But: requires permanent balancing between both types of objectives

Key factor (so far) for success and recognition = the quality and

consistency of contributions of network representatives (rather than

the fact that they represent powerful mass organisations)

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS


Recommendations (1/4)1. Continue + strategically expand + (in some cases) redirect existing

efforts => to maintain the momentum gained and to safeguard the achievements of the past

2. Increase southern membership, incl.:Measures to make voice of the South more consistently heardMechanisms to bring southern concerns and priorities more systematically on the advocacy agenda

3. Address representation and legitimacy more systematically: Increase southern participation Optimise internal consultation and representation mechanisms Explore possibilities to increase GUF participation


Recommendations (2/4)

4. Sustain, via TUDCN, the TUs’ dynamic engagement and leadership role in the CSO forums and platforms:

Continue to engage in issues that come up via international dynamics, but become somewhat more proactive here

Engage more consistently in in-country level work (via members)

Critical analysis and identification of the issues and forums TUDCN should concentrate on. Hereby:

Broaden the institutional targets (aside from the EU and the post-Busan process)

Focus on advocacy issues close to the core of TUDCN as a TU network

5. Give proportionally more attention to internal capacity building Incl.: support members to mainstream and/or diffuse tools & approaches in their organisations, partnerships and projects



6. Develop a comprehensive sustainability strategy, addressing:

Organisational sustainability: Further consolidation of the network

Particular attention to the present over-dependence on individuals

Institutional sustainability: clarify position towards and within the ITUC

Financial sustainability: develop a strategy to gradually become less dependent on external funding

7. Develop a campaigning approach and strategy, to make better use of the potential of the members in advocacy

8. Open the debate on the specific nature and interests of TUs within the broader CSO family



9. Further consolidate and develop the network internally:

Optimise and diversify consultation and participation mechanisms

Use General Meetings as a means to more actively engage members

Strengthen the FSG

Be a more formal in membership management

Make mailing list up-to-date

Continue to use short briefing papers to diffuse important messages

Give more attention to internal capitalisation of experiences

Discuss on how to further proceed with the work on M&E

10.Increase the resources of the network (incl.: expansion of the secretariat)

South Research CVBA - VSOLeuvensestraat 5/2B - 3010 Kessel - LoBelgiumT +32 (0) 16 49 83 16F +32 (0) 16 49 83 19BE 0429 809 077RPR Leuven

[email protected]

http://www.southresearch.be/

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

TUDCN 2011-12 external evaluation